RAVI BHATIA Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ravi Bhatia, petitioner, is standing trial in the court of Shri S.K. Sarvaria. Metropolitan Magistrate, Shahdara Delhi, for the offence punishable under Sec. 498A Indian Penal Code for his having allegedly subjected his wife, Mrs. Usha Bhatia, respondent No. 2 to cruelty. He had been granted bail , by the said court. On Sept. 3, 1987 an application was moved by his wife, Mrs. Usha Bhatia, complainant seeking cancellation of the bail allowed to the petitioner. It was alleged in the application that on Aug. 28, 1987 the petitioner along with five other persons came to her house in a car. They tried to kidnap her in order to commit her murder. She resisted the same in which she was brutally assaulted by the accused and his associates. As a result of that she sustained injuries and remained admitted to the hospital upto Aug. 31, 1987 and was still suffering from bodily pain. It was further stated that she (respondent No. 2) apprehended danger to her life at the hands of the accused/petitioner. The application was contested by the petitioner. He denied having visited the house of respondent No. 2 as alleged and stated that the version of the petitioner was a pure concoction made to secure the cancellation of his bail. It was stated that there has been bitter litigation's between the parties, on the matrimonial side as also the criminal litigation and respondent No. 2 who is a career woman was bent upon harassing the petitioner. Shri S.K. Sarvaria, Metropolitan Magistrate, by his Impugned order dated June 4, 1988 allowed the application of respondent No. 2 and cancelled the bail of the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner has filed this application under Sec. 439 read with Sec. 482 Code Criminal Procedure for setting aside of the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate and for restoring the bail allowed to him or for allowing fresh bail to him. This application has been opposed by the respondents. I may say at the very outset that after hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and going through the relevant material as adduced on the record of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate I am of the view that no ground was at all made out for cancellation of the bail of the petitioner and the learned Metropolitan Magistrate grossly erred in cancelling the bail of the petitioner and the petitioner deserves to be re-admitted to bail. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate in his impugned order has observed that he had obtained a report from the S.H.O. of the police station concerned i.e. P.S. Shakurpur on the application of respondent No. 2. No such report was, however, placed on the record of the case, nor is anything mentioned about the contents thereof in the impugned order. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, in his Impugned order first dealt with the question as to whether the application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner as moved by respondent No. 2 herself was or was not maintainable. After referring to some case law he came to the conclusion that the application was maintainable by respondent No. 2. He then dealt with the question as to how far the ground for cancellation of bail as stated in the application was made out by respondent No. 2. The para wherein the entire discussion in this regard is made is reproduced below :

(3.) Before parting I may also say here that during the pendency of the present petition a miscellaneous application, being Cr.M. 727/88, was also moved on behalf of respondent No. 2. By this application respondent No. 2 wanted this Court to take into consideration some alleged subsequent events in disposing of the present petition of Ravi Bhatia, petitioner. I need hardly say that no subsequent event can be taken into consideration for disposing of the petition in question, which has to be dealt with on the basis of the material that was before the learned Magistrate when he passed the impugned order. Cr. Misc. 727 of 1988 is accordingly dismissed. In view of what has been said above I accept the petition, set aside the impugned order of the learned trial court and re-admit the petitioner to bail. He be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000.00 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. Petition allowed.